Hey all! Anything to do with any clarification needed on the rules is a team project, so I can try to answer some things, but if we need to adjust the wording it will need to be ran by the group.
tersh wrote: ↑Sat Mar 10, 2018 7:17 pm
This seems to suggest that I would be breaking the rules if I sent my own full name or phone number to another user via PM.
And that the instagram thread would also be verboten. I assume this means "posting the personal information of anyone that isn't you (without their permission), given that this information is not already widely known and publicly available". I add the second bit, as it would seem silly to not allow pointing people at the social media accounts of someone like Jordan.
Yes, that's the intent. It's a replacement for the doxxing role, so the goal is to be more specific than "don't doxx", since the technical definition and the intended outcomes aren't necessarily identical.
What is meant here by "discussing suicide"? If I am feeling depressed, and post in my log (or even start a thread) about how I am struggling with suicidal thoughts (perhaps sharing how those thoughts manifest) and am reaching out for community support and contact, that would appear to be in violation of the rules. I assume this is meant to mean that one should not suggest to another forum member that they should go jump off a bridge.
Right - telling someone to kill themselves is not good. To be fair though, if anyone is actually having those mental health issues, they should seek out professional help.
cgeorg wrote: ↑Sat Mar 10, 2018 7:52 pmThis kind of smacks of another site whose moderators' actions ended up causing a fairly significant exodus from that site. Are you sure you want to go this route?
Tersh is absolutely correct - view any other successful forum that's relatively free of drama and conflict. They all follow this rule. If you have a complaint, it's outlined in the rules exactly how to address it, you aren't without recourse. Clarifying the rules as we have should mitigate cases where a violation is less than clear due to interpretation or the like.
SeanHerbison wrote: ↑Sun Mar 11, 2018 1:33 am
Can you clarify the bolded part?
If you start posting chapters from a book in the middle of a thread. Or dozens of pictures of the planets in the middle of a discussion about squats.
Raids?
Usually only a "thing" at larger sites. But imagine if there was a group that basically only posted in one section, say off topic. And that group decided to troll and spam another section, like the nutrition forum. Or perhaps the training forum posters get a group to go harass the bb.com training forum.
That's raiding.
How strictly is this going to be interpreted? I mean, the RTS forums have been overrun by spam for quite a while now, so does linking to a useful thread there violate this rule?
RTS isn't the one doing the spam. Linking to the spammers' sites would be the violation. Mainly it's too avoid linking to a porn site or the like.
Not really a question here, but I'm pretty sure someone who makes another account after getting perma-banned isn't going to care about this rule anyway.
It's grounds for an immediate ban without breaking any other rules. We've already had to do it, but again, most work is behind the curtain.
ETA:
@mgil has faster fingers than me!